savemeejeebus.bsky.social
savemeejeebus.bsky.social
@savemeejeebus.bsky.social
Under Lesson 5: Don’t Lose Momentum

Interesting!
September 2, 2025 at 3:23 AM
September 1, 2025 at 5:25 AM
What’s the problem? The article itself points out that California is significantly below the median state (like 28th percentile) in terms of percentage investor owned.

It also points out AL and WV are 3rd and 4th ranked for investor owned homes, but they aren’t known for affordability issues.
July 25, 2025 at 10:24 PM
At this rate I wonder when the “Secret Sex Parties with My Best Friend Jeffrey Epstein (This Sort of Thing Is My Bag, Baby), By Donald Trump” book is gonna be revealed
July 25, 2025 at 12:52 AM
July 13, 2025 at 5:14 AM
He’s definitely a suspect
July 8, 2025 at 12:01 AM
How the hell can people be surprised about this? What did they think “mass deportation now” meant?

Boston Globe called all this out 9 years ago
July 5, 2025 at 5:32 PM
Depends on whether they’ll finally throw this guy under the bus to do it
June 5, 2025 at 7:53 PM
May 25, 2025 at 1:39 PM
May 25, 2025 at 1:46 AM
Reminds me of Mississippi’s justification of slavery in their official Declaration of Secession
May 24, 2025 at 8:06 PM
May 11, 2025 at 3:19 AM
Needs more pockets. How else am I gonna carry around my minidisc player?
May 4, 2025 at 10:59 PM
Every time I see him with those aviators I just see Kara Swisher
April 29, 2025 at 3:56 AM
I don’t understand the 19% of people in this survey who thought Tony Soprano would vote for Harris as I couldn’t imagine a character more culturally, temperamentally, and economically inclined to vote for Trump than Tony Soprano (even more so than Archie Bunker)
April 27, 2025 at 9:30 PM
Yeah I think you’re probably right. Businesses thrive with certainty and Trump era part 2 began as anything but.

On the other hand, the “Trump announces a stupid policy -> Trump caves on said stupid policy” pattern is starting to become a predicable cadence
April 22, 2025 at 10:43 PM
He probably meant to use this screenshot
April 2, 2025 at 6:37 PM
Problem is that the historical context is that they could have put in stricter language to clarify it’s not just a prohibition against being elected president but in any service of the role at all, but they deliberately didn’t.

www.whitehousetransitionproject.org/wp-content/u...
April 1, 2025 at 3:45 PM
Unfortunately the original writers could have opted for stricter language but explicitly rejected it for “elected.”

Loophole is real enough for any Trump favored judge who wants to validate it

www.whitehousetransitionproject.org/wp-content/u...
April 1, 2025 at 4:12 AM
Yeah this loophole is big enough for Trump’s favored judges to drive a victory parade through if they wanted.

Don’t think it would turn out the way they intended though.
April 1, 2025 at 3:54 AM
Problem is that the original writers could have gone with stricter language but deliberately rejected it in favor of simply “elected”. The loophole is real enough for Trump’s favored judges to give him the go-ahead.

www.whitehousetransitionproject.org/wp-content/u...
April 1, 2025 at 3:45 AM
When the original writers explicitly rejected stricter language for simply “elected”, it could be argued it’s a deliberate loophole

www.whitehousetransitionproject.org/wp-content/u...
April 1, 2025 at 3:35 AM
Relevant passage highlighted
April 1, 2025 at 3:09 AM
It gives me no pleasure to report that the original writers of the amendment explicitly rejected stricter language, opting for “elected” instead of “chosen or serve as President… or be eligible to hold the office”.

www.whitehousetransitionproject.org/wp-content/u...
April 1, 2025 at 3:08 AM
He’d like that one.

I’d suggest something by @garypetersonusa.bsky.social
March 24, 2025 at 1:43 AM